Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v6 00/16] tcg/ppc: Add vector opcodes

[Aleksandar Markovic]

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 7:05 PM Mark Cave-Ayland <
address@hidden> wrote:

> On 01/07/2019 19:34, Howard Spoelstra wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 12:30 PM Richard Henderson <
> > address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> >> On 6/30/19 7:58 PM, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
> >>> I don't have space for a full set of images on the G4, however I've
> >> tried boot tests
> >>> on installer CDs for MacOS 9, OS X 10.2, Linux and HelenOS and it looks
> >> good here.
> >>>
> >>> Tested-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <address@hidden> [PPC32]
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >> Hi
> >
> > I just compiled the v6 set applied to current master on my G5, Ubuntu 16.
> > command line:
> > ./qemu-system-ppc -L pc-bios -boot c m 512 -M mac99,via=pmu \
> > -netdev user,id=net1 -device sungem,netdev=net1 \
> > -drive file=10.3.img,format=raw,media=disk \
> >
> > With no specific cpu set, Mac OS 9.2 hard disk image and 9.2 iso do not
> get
> > to the desktop, they just hang while still in the openbios window. They
> > need -cpu G4 on the command line to get to the desktop.
> >
> > OSX 10.3 installed image boots to desktop.
> > OSX 10.3 iso boots to installer
> > OSX 10.4 installed image boots to desktop.
> > OSX 10.4 iso boot to installer
> > OSX 10.5 installed image boots to desktop.
> > OSX 10.5 iso boots to installer
> >
> > So there seems to be a difference between hosts: If ran on a G4 host
> there
> > is no need to add -cpu G4 to run Mac OS 9.x, while there is when ran on a
> > G5 host.
>
> Are there any outstanding issues with this patchset now, or is it ready to
> be merged?
> I'm really looking forward to seeing the improved performance when testing
> QEMU on my
> Mac Mini :)
>
>
Howard pointed to some illogical quirks of command line:

> If ran on a G4 host there is no need to add -cpu G4 to run Mac OS 9.x,
> while there is when ran on a G5 host.

I am not sure if Howard says that this is a consequence of this series
though.

Overall, I think this is a very good series - however, I had a number of
minor
objections to multiple patches, that don't affect (or affect in a minimal
way)
provided functionality - those objections are not addressed, nor properly
discussed - but I do think they should be addressed in order to get the
series
in a better shape before upstreaming.

Thanks,
Aleksandar


> ATB,
>
> Mark.
>
>